The role of teachers in facilitating situational interest in an active-learning classroom

Teaching and Teacher Education

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 37-42

  Rotgans, Jerome I ^a   Schmidt, Henk G ^b  

^a Republic Polytechnic   (Singapore)

^b ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Cognitive congruence; Problem based learning; Situational interest; Social congruence; Subject matter expertise; Teacher characteristics

Indexed keywords

EID: 78649324346     PISSN: 0742051X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2010.06.025     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Alwis, W. A. M., & O'Grady, G. (2002). One day-one problem at Republic Polytechnic. Paper presented at the 4th Asia-Pacific conference on PBL.
2. Antepohl W., Herzig S. Problem-based learning versus lecture-based learning in a course of basic pharmacology: a controlled, randomized study. Medical Education 1999, 33(2):106-113.
3. Arbuckle J.L. Amos 5.0 update to the Amos user's guide 2003, Marketing Dept., SPSS Inc., SmallWaters Corp.
4. Barrows H.S. How to design a problem-based curriculum for the preclinical years 1985, Springer Publishing, New York.
5. Barrows H.S. The tutorial process 1988, University School of Medicine, Springfield, IL.
6. Bentler P.M. Alpha, dimension-free, and model-based internal consistency reliability. Psychometrika 2009, 74(1):137-143.
7. Bergin D.A. Influences on classroom interest. Educational Psychologist 1999, 34(2):87-98.
8. Black A.E., Deci E.L. The effects of instructors' autonomy support and students' autonomous motivation on learning organic chemistry: a self-determination theory perspective. Science Education 2000, 84(6):740-756.
9. Brok P., Brekelmans M., Wubbels T. Interpersonal teaching behaviour and student outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement 2004, 15(3-4):407-442.
10. Byrne B.M. Structural equation modeling with Amos: Basic concepts, applications and programming 2001, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc, Mahwah, N.J.
11. Cordova D.I., Lepper M.R. Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology 1996, 88(4):715-730.
12. Dahlgren M.A., Dahlgren L.O. Portraits of PBL: students' experiences of the characteristics of problem-based learning in physiotherapy, computer engineering and psychology. Instructional Science 2002, 30(2):111-127.
13. De Grave W.S., Dolmans D., van der Vleuten C.P.M. Profiles of effective tutors in problem-based learning: scaffolding student learning. Medical Education 1999, 33(12):901-906.
14. Deci E.L. The relation of interest to the motivation of behavior: a self-determination theory perspective. The role of interest in learning and development 1992, 43-70. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ. K.A. Renninger, S. Hidi, A. Krapp (Eds.).
15. Fan X., Thompson B., Wang L. Effects of sample size, estimation methods, and model specification on structural equation. Structural Equation Modeling 1999, 6(1):56-83.
16. Gijselaers W.H., Tempelaar D.T., Keizer P.K., Blommaert J.M., Bernard E.M., Kasper H. Educational innovation in economics and business education: The case of problem-based learning 1995, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht.
17. Grave W.S.D., Dolmans D., Vleuten C.P.M. Tutor intervention profile: reliability and validity. Medical Education 1998, 32(3):262-268.
18. Green S.B., Yang Y. Commentary on coefficient alpha: a cautionary tale. Psychometrika 2009, 74(1):121-135.
19. Hancock G.R., Mueller R.O. Rethinking construct reliability within latent systems. Structural equation modeling: Present and future - A festschrift in honor of Karl Jöreskog 2001, 195-216. Scientific Software International, Lincolnwood, IL. R. Cudeck, S.D. Toit, D. Sörbom (Eds.).
20. Hidi S. Interest and its contribution as a mental resource for learning. Review of Educational Research 1990, 60(4):549-571.
21. Hidi S. Interest: a unique motivational variable. Educational Research Review 2006, 1(2):69-82.
22. Hidi S., Renninger K.A. The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist 2006, 41(2):111-127.
23. Hmelo-Silver C.E. Problem-based learning: what and how do students learn?. Educational Psychology Review 2004, 16(3):235-266.
24. Hu L., Bentler P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling 1999, 6(1):1-55.
25. Kendler B.S., Grove P.A. Problem-based learning in the biology curriculum. American Biology Teacher 2004, 66(5):348-354.
26. Khoo H.E. Implementation of problem-based learning in Asian medical schools and students' perceptions of their experience. Medical Education 2003, 37(5):401-409.
27. Kirschner P.A., Sweller J., Clark R.E. Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist 2006, 41(2):75-86.
28. Lockspeiser T.M., O'Sullivan P., Teherani A., Muller J. Understanding the experience of being taught by peers: the value of social and cognitive congruence. Advances in Health Sciences Education 2008, 13(3):361-372.
29. Long J.F. Connecting with the content: How teacher interest affects student interest in a core course 2003, Ohio State University.
30. Long, J. F., & Murphy, P. K. (2005). Connecting through content: The responsiveness of teacher and student interest in a core course. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association.
31. Mitchell M. Situational interest: its multifaceted structure in the secondary mathematics classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology 1992, 85(3):424-436.
32. Moust J.H.C. The role of tutors in problem-based learning. Contrasts between student- and staff-tutors 1993, University of Limburg, Maastricht.
33. Moust J.H.C., Nuy H.J. Preparing teachers for a problem-based student-centred law course. Journal of Professional Legal Education 1987, 5(1):16-30.
34. Paris S.G., Paris A.H. Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist 2001, 36(2):89-101.
35. Pintrich P.R. A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review 2004, 16(4):385-407.
36. Reynolds F. Studying psychology at degree level: would problem-based learning enhance students' experiences?. Studies in Higher Education 1997, 22(3):263-275.
37. Rotgans, J. I., & Schmidt, H. G. Situational interest and achievement in the active-learning classroom. Learning and Instruction, in press doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.11.001.
38. Rotgans, J. I., & Schmidt, H. G. (2009). Situational interest, task engagement, and achievement in an active-learning environment. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association.
39. Ryan R.M., Deci E.L. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist 2000, 55(1):68-78.
40. Sanson-Fisher R.W., Lynagh M.C. Problem-based learning: a dissemination success story?. Medical Journal of Australia 2005, 183(5):258-260.
41. Schmidt H.G. Problem-based learning: rationale and description. Medical Education 1983, 17(1):11-16.
42. Schmidt H.G. Foundations of problem-based learning: some explanatory notes. Medical Education 1993, 27(5):422-432.
43. Schmidt H.G., Moust J.H.C. What makes a tutor effective? A structural equations modelling approach to learning in problem-based curricula. Academic Medicine 1995, 70(1):708-714.
44. Schmidt H.G., Moust J.H.C. Factors affecting small-group tutorial learning: a review of research. Problem-based learning: A research perspective in learning interactions 2000, 19-52. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. D.H. Evensen, C.E. Hmelo-Silver (Eds.).
45. Schmidt H.G., Van der Arend A., Moust J.H.C., Kokx I., Boon L. Influence of tutors' subject-matter expertise on student effort and achievement in problem-based learning. Academic Medicine 1993, 68(10):784-791.
46. Schmidt H.G., Van der Molen H.T., Te Winkel W.W.R., Wijnen W.H.F.W. Constructivist, problem-based, learning does work: a meta-analysis of curricular comparisons involving a single medical school. Educational Psychologist 2009, 44(4):227-249.
47. Schoenfeld A.H. Teaching mathematical thinking and problem solving. Toward the thinking curriculum: Current cognitive research 1989, 83-103. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA. L.B. Resnick, L.E. Klopfer (Eds.).
48. Schraw G., Flowerday T., Lehman S. Increasing situational interest in the classroom. Educational Psychology Review 2001, 13(3):211-224.
49. Schraw G., Lehman S. Situational interest: a review of the literature and directions for future research. Educational Psychology Review 2001, 13(1):23-52.
50. Sijtsma K. On the use, the misuse, and the very limited usefulness of Cronbach's alpha. Psychometrika 2009, 74(1):107-120.
51. Sloboda J.A., Davidson J.W. The young performing musician. The origins and development of musical competence 1995, 171-190. Oxford University Press, London. I. Deliege, J.A. Sloboda (Eds.).
52. Solomon P., Crowe J. Perceptions of student peer tutors in a problem-based learning programme. Medical Teacher 2001, 23(2):181-186.
53. SPSS SPSS 16.0 base user's guide 2007, SPSS Inc, Chicago.
54. Tiwari A., Lai P., So M., Yuen K. A comparison of the effects of problem-based learning and lecturing on the development of students' critical thinking. Medical Education 2006, 40(6):547-554.
55. Zimmerman B.J. Investigating self-regulation and motivation: historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal 2008, 45(1):166-183.